DTV Is Coming and I'm Not Ready 376
(arg!)Styopa writes "As an early adopter, I have an HDTV-ready set without an integrated tuner. Analog television ends next February. My suspicion is that the $40 set-top box at Walmart has the minimum functionality to get by — i.e. simply a D-to-A converter and not an HDTV receiver. Three years ago I bought a UHF super-antenna (I'm about 40 mi. from the towers: borderline fringe reception) and searched for an HDTV converter to pull down HDTV OTA broadcasts. These were extremely hard to find — none at Radio Shack, Best Buy, Circuit City, or Ultimate Electronics (all the local bigboxen). I ended up buying a SIRT150 from eBay, which never found a signal, despite confirmed reception (on the set's normal tuner) of both VHF and UHF channels. So — any advice on what to look for in a set-top box? Is it going to cost me an arm and a leg, or is it not too far from the $40 Walmart special? Can I use Uncle Sam's $40 coupon towards it? I'd like very much to be able to find a physical store where I could go see the signal, before I decide if HD is worth the up-charge (if any) over simple DTV."
Put your money where your mouth is (Score:5, Informative)
Parent may be harsh, but it's not a troll (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I went tunerless because it is my experience that things change over time, and that the odds favored more features, capability, compatibility, etc. if I got the tuner later.
While I waited for DTV, my actual HDTV, which was a high end component design, went essentially obsolete -- the 1080p it was capable of became forbidden unless it was HDMI, which, the TV being very early, it didn't have.
So now I have yet another system -- a projector, actually -- which does support HDMI, but, and I'm sure you've a
Re:Parent may be harsh, but it's not a troll (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, you're confused. My display system supported 1080p via the component inputs. There's nothing magical about 1080p such that it can't be sent over component, technically speaking. It isn't even that big a deal, it's quite similar in terms of bandwidth to what middle of the road computer displays have been doing for years.
However, after my purchase, collusion in the industry led to a state of affairs where 1080p was not going to be transmitted from component outputs, ever — only via HDMI. Not because it wasn't feasible, it certainly is, but because it couldn't be easily copy-protected. Even my current Sony (STR-DA5300ES) won't convert the 1080p HDMI signal to component for the second set of outputs; heck, it won't even activate the audio tape-outs if the signal is HDMI. Disgusting, really. But that's another rant.
So in the end, there were no program sources. My receiver (a really nice Denon) and my display (a projector whose details I no longer recall) were both perfectly capable of 1080p; but you can't get a 1080p *source* except via an HDMI jack at this point, so the display was limited to what it *could* get over component, which is either 1080i (ugh -- interlace is what I wanted to get away from) or 720p. 720p's not bad... until you've seen 1080p.
BTW, 1080p/24 requires less bandwidth than 1080i/30o/30e, which is what most of the satellite providers source (albeit at shoddy bitrates... but presuming similar compression, 1080p/24 is less greedy by about 20%. And that'd cover most movies made to date.) Not that this has anything to do with my subject matter, but you did mention bandwidth when talking broadcast issues.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem with 1080i60 versus 1080p30 being stored, is that even though they are the same bandwidth once decompressed, for interlaced material you compress the odd fields and then the even fields, like compressing two separate, but similar, lower resolution images completely separately. It's far less efficient.
Most modern video codecs' motion compensation contains half-pixel interpolation. Apply this vertically to predict one field from the preceding one. Then you could compress one field off the previous field stored as a keyframe. Or is there something in MPEG-2 or -4 that bans predicting an even field from an odd or vice versa?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
He could very well have shelled out big bucks at some specialty store for an early model HDTV w/o all the bells and whistles that are standard today, simply because they didn't have them "way back when" - 3 to 4 years ago.
What does someone who bought a 60" Sony projection TV 3 years ago do? Same thing - big bucks out, lack of "standard features" 3 years down the road, and "obsolete" to
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I'm surprised at the lack of these tuners in a standalone format. There may be more demand than manufacturers realize.
And why shouldn't the government coupons be used as part payment? They're to allow folk who can no longer get an analogue signal receive a digital one. Why
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung DTB-H260F (Score:2, Informative)
For some reason basically nobody else has made one of these things, but it's ok, because the price isn't that bad, and it's a really good tuner.
Re:Put your money where your mouth is (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Put your money where your mouth is (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I don't care (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I could moderate you as troll, I would. You claim you don't watch TV, yet you download TV SHOWS and likely movies as well and watch those. All you've done is time-shift your viewing. You're a hypocrite. You still watch TV!
I have a lot more respect, obviously, for those who don't simply replace "TV" with a computer monitor and pretend they're somehow better.
Yes, I watch TV. I also time-shift it with a DVR to fit my schedule. And I'm not afraid to say it
Re:Put your money where your mouth is (Score:5, Informative)
Cheap? What about those of us who really don't care about digital TV?
I guess those people shouldn't read a question submitted by someone who DOES care about digital TV, and think it applies to them.
( either by direct purchase of this 'converter', or my tax dollars going to fund them for others ).
Ignorance is fun, isn't it? Your "tax dollars" aren't going to fund the coupon program. the money is coming from the sale of the analog TV spectrum.
This whole thing is just another way to get DRM into your home
Huh? Now I know you're cracked. The converters for the coupon program all have analog out on them (and in fact are REQUIRED to ONLY have analog out).
It might actually make sense to KNOW something about the thing you're trying to make a conspiracy theory about. That way you can avoid the theories that don't even fit with the established facts.
Re:Ignorance of what... Politics? (Score:3, Insightful)
but it is more taxes than we would be paying without the coupon program.
If you think the amount of money the government receives has anything to do with your tax rate, you might want to pay a bit more attention to political science rather economics. We're currently in serious deficit spending mode, and yet the tax rates have gone DOWN. (Yes, it's dumb, but that's politics for you). Tax rates are determined by politicians, not any kind of sane relationship between incomeexpenses.
Re:Put your money where your mouth is (Score:4, Interesting)
LOL.
I love it. Its a classic.
"We were forced to confiscate your back yard to buld a 6-lane private toll-road, but do not fret! The fire fighters, police men and ambulances will pay no fee on it! Thank you for your public service! Aren't you feeling all warm and tingly inside? Also Remember 9-11! 9-11!"
You Sir, should have become a politiican! You even managed to get 9-11 into it! I can just hear your speech at the launch of the Mega Corporate National Fabricated Happy News Network, DTV edition: "If you do not buy a DTV set now and do not subscribe to at least 100 DRM-covered vapid channels then Osama Bin Laden wins!"
Meanwhile, in this Universe, 99% or so of the freed bandwith will be auctioned (for gazillions of dollars - which will in the case of USA promptly head to Haliburton via Iraq) to private corporations of one shape or another.
Its a lovely deal: the public gets shafted by the corporates from all directions repeteadly on the same deal! Its like a Kung Fu mastery of rank avarice.
And then of course are you, actually trying to peddle the smiley-face corporate PR line on Slashdot, like you were serious!
Sure, the old technologies must eventually be replaced by newer, more efficient ones (which DTV debatably, supposedly is - in some cases, for some users). But this has nothing to do with technological progress and everything to do with shameless greed!
I retruned my ez47 and havent bought a replacement (Score:4, Informative)
Because of that purchase (they arent that cheap either), I have been very wary of other DVD recorder + ATSC tuner combos, and just plain ATSC Tuners as well. I have read too many reviews on multiple different ones claiming similar issues: slow channel changes, random lockups, poor UI design, failure to just do what its supposed to do, lack or errors in the program guide, etc. I wish BestBuy or someone would actually set these up for people to try to use them before taking home such a piece of crap. I actually was looking at digital tuners at Best Buy today and saw 3 of the Ez47 on the open item discount rack, and more surprisingly, at $300, more than I paid retail, and more than the brand new unopened EZ48 (same as 47 but has USB as well).
To get back on topic, the combo devices seem to all be crap. Most of the DVD recorders themselves do not come with tuners at all, which makes them almost useless without some external tuner, since almost every HDTV does not have a video-out jack (ie: how do you record the TV channel if you cant output it??). I did see a samsung HDTV tuner box, but it was $179 and probably not eligible for the coupon since it did HD signals as well. The other one was the cheapo $59 ($40 coupon eligible) converter box, which just has cable-in cable-out and A/V RCA jacks for stereo audio out and rf video out.
tm
Get cable or satellite tv and you will get more HD (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not real HD (Score:2, Insightful)
Slashdot has some posts a while back with links to content comparisons you could see yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
The broadcast signal may deliver the better picture. In this town, reception of U.S. and Canadian border stations is quite good - worth the investment even if you have a dish.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
my OTA PBS,CBS and NBC channels look 500% better OTA than the compressed to hell HD signal that Comcast gives out. Cripes I see motion artifacts and nasty green blockies on comcast. Switch to the Antenna and they are not there.
Re:Get cable or satellite tv and you will get more (Score:5, Informative)
Comcast's carriage agreements (and apparently the FCC as well) prohibit them from recompressing any OTA-originated signals. What you'd be seeing on Comcast is exactly the same thing you'd be seeing OTA (interference notwithstanding). Hook up a device that can read the bitrate of the signal, you'll find that it's exactly the same on Comcast as it is OTA. The rest of their HD programming(non-OTA) is indeed rather compressed depending on the time and channel, but all the OTA stuff is exactly the same.
If you're seeing a difference, either your local Comcast office is not following their own agreements, or you're getting some interference on the frequencies used. IIRC the AVSforum guy who was doing quality testing last month even confirmed this.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's worse than that. Comcast buys their content from a variety of sources, and from what I understand that programming is often compressed all to hell (to save bandwidth charges, I suppose) before it even gets to Comcast's head end. That goes for any other cable company and/or satellite for that matter. Try watching a Stargate SG-1 re-run on Sci-Fi, for example
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
TV? (Score:3, Insightful)
I personally have no plans to upgrade any of my TV's. Call me whatever you please, but I simply do not find anything worth watching on TV anymore. Sure, I will miss my football games, but really, it just isn't worth it anymore. I can still watch my movies on my DVD player, and I get all of my news from the Internet or my local radio station (for severe weather alerts).
So, why do we need to upgrade again? Without content that is actually worth watching, I see no reason to waste the money.
Re: (Score:2)
Just replace it. (Score:2)
Just consign this set for watching in the garage, and get something new for your entertainment center.
CRT HDTV is Great (Score:3, Informative)
Except that it doesn't have a built-in ATSC tuner, that is.
I watch most everything through MythTV, so my solution is a (now cheap) ATSC tuner card.
Re:CRT HDTV is Great (Score:4, Insightful)
Those are the problems with CRT HDTVs.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even now CRT still holds many advantages over LCD, plasma, and projection, but nobody is willing to produce them any longer.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The only really serious problem with one of those would be trying to actually move it to make way for a new one...
You're not looking hard enough (Score:2, Informative)
And you don't need a new antenna, just use the old one--should work fine.
The $40 box may not help you (Score:2, Informative)
The $40 coupon will buy you a converter that operates much like a cable box. The ones I bought have a coax output and three wire AV outp
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What you need... (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference is noticeable, but it's largely individual taste whether it's really worth it. Some people like to see fine details in the wide shots in football, and they'll like it more than people who are only interested in the plot of a drama. AV gear forums will be a better place if you're interested in the details. If you just want to see them in action, wander into anywhere that sells TVs, and they'll have a whole bunch of HD sets next to SD sets, and you can see if it matters to you.
If you've had an HD set this long but haven't bothered to pick up an ATSC tuner before now, why do you suddenly care? It seems odd that you plopped down that much cash for a TV but then never bothered to buy the extra accessory to actually use it.
Re:What you need... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Not true. There are plenty of uses for a TV besides over-the-air programming.
It's still going to work fine as a display for a Wii, an X
Re:What you need... (Score:4, Insightful)
Where would the "cheap coverters" get the signal from if they DIDN'T have ATSC tuners?
Re: (Score:2)
Wait for the Phantom set-top box (Score:5, Funny)
Samsung (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.tvfool.com/ [tvfool.com]
That site will help you out with your signal levels. It depends on where you are as to what kind of antenna you need. While an outdoor antenna is always better, the Zenith Silver Sensor (or whatever they're calling it these days) is one of the best indoor antennas, and I would definitely recommend you look into that one.
http://www.rabbitears.info/ [rabbitears.info]
That's my site. It can help you figure out what programming is available.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I would definitely say that the SIR-T150 is among the worst tuners I've seen. I live in a fringe area, and I can tell you the T150 was not good about handling weak signals. In fact, it went back to the store and I got my Zenith HDV420, which I like much more. Definitely a superior device. Reception is better, PSIP handling is better...
It's certainly not the WORST tuner I
SIRT150?! (Score:2, Informative)
Modern receivers, including the $40 box at Wal-Mart, perform much better. However, the $40 box is not HDTV; it outputs an analog 480P signal on channel 3 or a composite video signal.
I shou
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I've tried them all, and only the digital stream brand at rat-shack was the one that pulled in as many stations as my high end Scenium set and tuner. it also was the ONLY one that has a feature that is incredibly important. a signal strength meter.
Just a couple of suggestions.... (Score:2)
This is what I do. I do not care normally to be the guy who works out all the problems for you. I know that you are asking here hoping someone else did the work for you... in which case, stop calling yourself the early adopter per se'.
There is no silver bullet for HDTV yet. It's ALL smoke and mirrors, hy
No. (Score:2)
$121/year doesn't strech very far (Score:2)
Most sports games I've seen will suck up your $121 in a single event, for one person, much less a family.
Theater wise, tickets are up to $10 in some places, that's be one movie a month, not including any refreshments. Meanwhile at home I can use the airpopper and bagged corn for a bowl that costs me less than a buck.
I have an antenna hooked up to my TV, but I mostly use the DVD functions, as it's cheaper than going to the
Surprise: in 2009 some DTV will move VHF band (Score:2)
I, too, bought a UHF-only "HDTV" antenna. I was suckered.
It is temporarily true, but in 2009, when analog broadcasting is discontinued, some of the stations that are currently broadcasting analog on VHF and DTV on UHF will move their DTV broadcasts to the VHF band.
One example is WHDH-DT in Boston, which is currently broadcasting DTV on channel 42, but next year will change its frequency assignment to VHF channel 7, according to antenna [antennaweb.org]
Build a MythTV DVR (Score:2)
Having had a DVR since 99 or so, I can't imagine using a TV without one.
Re: (Score:2)
Get a big dish (Score:2)
Those things are cool.
cooler than directTV.
eBay to the rescue once again. (Score:2)
CECBs (Score:2, Informative)
Also for the best antenna orientation I use www.antennaweb.org.
-ac
HD Girls say YES its worth it (Score:2)
If you watch ANY of the major 'movie-like' series (Lost, 24, CSI, law shows, etc) or ANY sports then HDTV is well worth it, sight unseen, trust me, the first time you see Evangeline Lilly in HD you will forget about any money spent
TiVo HD (Score:2)
Once you go HD, you can't stand SD anymore.
Once you go DVR, you can't st
A Technologically interesting solution (Score:2)
Okay, so that isn't feasible with modern technology but just imagine how awesome a solution that would be. No need to deal with another device to switch c
That's right, the $40 coupon box is not for you (Score:2)
Where has Submitter been all these years? Certainly not with those of us who wanted HDTV tuners for the past few years, and had to deal with the high prices and a lower supply than the Wii. If you could find them, they were usually $200 or more, and the tuner sections weren't as good as in the current generation of "converter boxes".
Although it's not quite that bad. There are some HD satellite boxes with ATSC tuners, and if you're lucky and know what to look for, you can find one at a thrift store for ten
"never found a signal" (Score:2)
I ended up buying a SIRT150 from eBay, which never found a signal, despite confirmed reception (on the set's normal tuner) of both VHF and UHF channels.
That means one of a few things: 1) your antenna is crap (or you only used VHF rabbit ears without a UHF loop) 2) you didn't try rotating your antenna (especially important to tune out the multipath ghost signals when you're within 20 miles of the transmitter) 3) you tried it a few years ago when most stations were still operating their digital transmitter at low power, or more likely 4) someone sold you a broken unit.
Usually in any given area there will be at least one or two stations that are hard not t
Wow, you didn't get answers, did you? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm viewing at a threshold of 4, and it's pretty much just people telling the OP how stupid he is. It doesn't seem helpful. So, maybe this will be of assistance.
The COBY DTV 140 [alvio.com] is pretty bad-ass for people who are not on the HDTV bandwagon. It's ATSC. It will even downconvert HDTV signals to a standard old TV, if you're REALLY falling behind. It has a few outputs (DVI/Monitor, Component Video, S-Video, Composite Video). It used to be that the menus for the system would only display on a HDTV, so if you had an old SDTV, you'd have to borrow an HDTV to set it up. But newer versions have menus that work just great on SDTV, which I have, and I can confirm it works. I also have an Optoma HD70, which is a projector that can do HDTV if you can feed it a signal. The COBY works great with that too. My nearest signal comes from 39 miles away, and most are more like 45 miles away. It's able to catch a lot of those weak signals and get really good pictures. But not all.
Also, since the COBY seems to be nearing the end of its run, there is a newer item that seems to get OK reviews, the Samsung DTBH260F [amazon.com]. It's about twice as much as the COBY and it cannot downsample to SDTV, from what I have read. However, it will upsample SDTV into 720, which I don't think my COBY does (it just delivers it at 480). It also can pull in signals from about 50 miles away, which is pretty great. The Samsung is more for people who got halfway -- like the OP -- and bought a HDTV that doesn't have a tuner. It supposedly has excellent capability for assembling a great image from over-the-air signals -- better than the compressed images you get from cable. I wouldn't know. I don't own it. I just know it has good reviews. Good luck.
Also, for those of you admonishing the OP to just get cable or satellite, I would point out that I paid a one-time $80 fee to buy my product, and I've had crystal-clear free HDTV for a year now. How much have you paid for your cable or dish network over the last year? I'm pretty sure it was more than $80. So I don't think the OP is that stupid. He's aware that there are free signals out there, and he's trying to get them. That seems pretty smart, IMHO.
Not only... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Do what millions of others will do: (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Do what millions of others will do: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Someone revoke his geek card now.
Do what I did instead. (Score:5, Informative)
Almost any TV show that's any good will be there after the season is over, and pretty much any movie ever released on DVD will be ready to ship out to you on short order.
While there's a shipping delay involved, I think it's more than made up for by the far greater selection and *lack of ads*. And it's a lot cheaper.
Really, doing this completely changed the way I consume video-based culture -- instead of having the TV sitting there to just pick up when I couldn't decide what to do, inevitably watching crap and making do with what was on, I now make a conscious decision about everything I watch and spend my entertainment time only watching what I really want to see.
Good heavens, Netflix should be paying me for this. I'm serious, though, it makes a big difference.
Re:Do what I did instead. (Score:5, Informative)
When I was living in the US, this is exactly what I was doing. I was a grad student, and my $20/mo Netflix account got me access to all the major networks, plus the paid cable channels (HBO, etc.), all without ads, all with perfect reception. I also had movies--everything from big blockbusters to tiny art-house flicks.
Cheaper than any other TV option, and you get all the movies you can eat.
It's one of the things I really miss here in Japan. Instead, I BitTorrent TV, which is free, but not as convenient, doesn't look as good, and provides no revenue to the people who make things I want to watch (mod me down, if you will, for wanting to pay people for creating things--even if it means relying on a corrupt and totally unfair system).
Damn I miss Netflix.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Hey StreetStealth, you're a fan of battlestar right? What do you think happened to the number Sixes and number Eight cylons when the number ones tricked them into that ambush?"
".. I'm not going to see that episode for another 5 months, stop spoiling it!"
If anything I'd say just download the tv shows. You can easily grab past seasons in bulk and current seasons within a day or so. Not as good as being able to watch it live with friends, but better than waiting
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Did you even consider that maybe there are people in the world capable of owning a TV and not watching Britney's every move? Who might just watch it for the weather and news? You know, maybe lik
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Do what millions of others will do: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"live without" and I applaud them because I'm jealous.
Sometimes I wish I could arse myself to get rid of the box
but then what would I do on all those lazy evenings?
Like it or not, TV is an awfully convenient pacifier drug and
while there *is* quality content we all know that 99% of our
TV-time is spent on consuming mental garbage.
I don't envy TV-less people for volunteering to
miss that 1% of quality content. I envy them for
being willing and able to fill th
Re: (Score:2)
DON'T take off your shoes... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
RS
Re: (Score:2)
Why would HDTV become mandatory? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Keep in mind that most of TV content was actually FILMED (infact, most is still being filmed) so all we need to do is pull it out of the vaults, re-telecine it in HD, and there you go.
True, but... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:After paying for an early HDTV... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:After paying for an early HDTV... (Score:4, Informative)
And he should be. Those "digital antennas" are scams.* The digital signals are on a subset of the analog band. That was the whole point of going digital: to free up some of that bandwidth for other purposes (like generating revenue for the government in a big auction!)
*ok, since it's a subset of the bandwidth, you might be able to squeeze out a tiny bit more gain, or build the antenna more cheaply. (less bandwidth means thinner diameter wires, don't cha know) But if you already have a working antenna, there is absolutely no reason to go out and buy another one.
Re:After paying for an early HDTV... (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/762088/coat_hanger_hdtv_antenna_better_than_store_bought_amazing/ [metacafe.com]
Re:After paying for an early HDTV... (Score:4, Informative)
http://uhfhdtvantenna.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
It's similar to the design in the video, but puts the elements on 7" centers, and uses the 3.5 inch width of the 2x4 mast it's built on to correctly position the reflector relative to them. To this I added a pair of VHF-length elements, fastened to the point where the balun is attached, and cut them to 28" each (measured from the middle of the mounting screw). I suppose technically these elements should be mounted on 24.5" standoffs, but they work fine.
Like the other one, mine isn't pretty, but it only cost me about $4 for the supplies, since I had some scrap lumber and a balun handy already. Even analog signals show a considerable improvement.
It might also be worth looking into the Hoverman design. By the look of it, these two 2x4-and-coat-hanger projects are variants of that design. This site has all the gory details, and focuses on a so-called "Gray-Hoverman" variation:
http://www.digitalhome.ca/ota/superantenna/ [digitalhome.ca]
Re: (Score:2)
Cost out of pocket: $10. The one I saw had coax and RCA out, not even SVid. That should give you an idea of what channels are out there.
Then again,
First step, go to Antennaweb.org and enter your adress, it'll tell you what you can expect to receive.
Second, get a walmart box to verify. See if you like the channels
Re: (Score:2)
That said, with the $60/month regular analog plan, all the local HDTV broadcast stations are rebroadcast uncompressed and unencrypted. I believe it's required by the FCC.